P-3AT versus Kahr PM9

Mike H · March 13, 2005, 11:31 PM

I'm having trouble figuring out why anyone would go with a P-3AT over a Kahr PM9.

Both are true pocket guns, but the Kahr offers a lot of extra power with the 9mm.

Anyone make the same comparison - Kahrs just don't seem to be that popular.

Mike H

Hayley · March 14, 2005, 12:32 AM

Weight, size and price?

TheSpoGun · March 14, 2005, 05:37 AM

To be honest, unless the KelTec's have gotten ALOT better from an example I fired about 7 years ago, I'd say the KelTec and the Kahr are 2 different animals. I carry a K9 off duty, and the gun just feels better in the hand than the Keltec, and seems more solidly built. My Kahr has a pretty decent trigger, and has never failed me with easily 3,500+ rounds fired, mostly my issued +P stuff. I'm not saying Kahrs don't have problems, but, compared to the P11 KelTec I fired, with it's 2 stoppages in 1 magazine, and "gritty" feeling trigger, my choice would be Kahr hands down.

CougarRed · March 14, 2005, 09:56 AM

Who said Kahrs aren't popular? I own 2. I carry a P9 Covert in my pocket every day.

Same grip as the PM9, with the slide, barrel and recoil set up of the P9. It's a little less than an inch longer than the PM9, and 1 oz heavier. Extra length in slide/barrel does not affect pocket concealment for me, but does provide better sight plane and more muzzle velocity. And I prefer the traditional recoil set up vs. Seecamp system in PM9.

That said, there are a ton of people walking around with a PM9 who love them.

While Keltec also enjoys some popularity because the P3AT and P32 weigh 7 oz and cost less than Kahrs, no one disputes that a 9mm is a much better self defense round than the .380 or .32. And no one disputes that Kahr's trigger is much better than KelTecs.

Until recently, Kahr's main competitor in the mini-9 market was the Glock 26. I prefer the Kahr, as do a lot of people. Now, Rohrbaugh has entered the fray. But their gun costs twice as much as a Kahr, limiting their market.

Watch-Six · March 15, 2005, 01:21 PM

The Kahr is a much better pistol. It does, however, cost more and weigh more. Not really a fair comparision. Watch-Six

U.F.O. · March 15, 2005, 01:31 PM

Bad comparison. The P-3AT, for me, is a "last chance" carry weapon. It'll fit invisibly in a front pocket where my PM9 would look like I was carrying a brick. The Kel-Tec is that much smaller. Strictly for deep, deep cover. I view the P-3AT as a derringer alternative. The Kahr PM9 works best for me IWB with a shirt-tail out.

U.F.O.

FirstFreedom · March 15, 2005, 04:35 PM

What UFO said. The PM9 is too big for pocket carry (for me), even though yes, it's better quality than the KelTec. The proper comparison for the KelTec P3AT is tiny .32s, .22s, .25s, and derringers.

Eric Larsen · March 15, 2005, 08:04 PM

Why do you guys make me want to call you spoiled?

I carried a K40 in my pocket and still carry a Makarov all of the time as a BUG! The PM is NOTHING like these guns. Hell I could carry one in every pocket and love it.

The Kahr is a better gun.....nicer finish, trigger, machining etc.......
The KT is still a good gun......not as nice but nice.

Shoot well..............

bubbygator · March 15, 2005, 11:00 PM

The current P3AT is light-years ahead of KelTec's offerings 7 years ago. Mine was perfectly reliable straight from the box.

Otherwise, I second what has been said above.

March 13, 2005, 11:31 PM	#1
Mike H Senior Member Join Date: August 26, 1999 Posts: 1,159	P-3AT versus Kahr PM9 I'm having trouble figuring out why anyone would go with a P-3AT over a Kahr PM9. Both are true pocket guns, but the Kahr offers a lot of extra power with the 9mm. Anyone make the same comparison - Kahrs just don't seem to be that popular. Mike H

March 14, 2005, 05:37 AM	#3
TheSpoGun Member Join Date: December 22, 2004 Posts: 25	Kahr vs KelTec?? To be honest, unless the KelTec's have gotten ALOT better from an example I fired about 7 years ago, I'd say the KelTec and the Kahr are 2 different animals. I carry a K9 off duty, and the gun just feels better in the hand than the Keltec, and seems more solidly built. My Kahr has a pretty decent trigger, and has never failed me with easily 3,500+ rounds fired, mostly my issued +P stuff. I'm not saying Kahrs don't have problems, but, compared to the P11 KelTec I fired, with it's 2 stoppages in 1 magazine, and "gritty" feeling trigger, my choice would be Kahr hands down.

March 15, 2005, 01:31 PM	#6
U.F.O. Senior Member Join Date: October 22, 2004 Location: TN Posts: 513	Bad comparison. The P-3AT, for me, is a "last chance" carry weapon. It'll fit invisibly in a front pocket where my PM9 would look like I was carrying a brick. The Kel-Tec is that much smaller. Strictly for deep, deep cover. I view the P-3AT as a derringer alternative. The Kahr PM9 works best for me IWB with a shirt-tail out. U.F.O. __________________ "But today you just read that the man was shot dead By a gun that didn’t make any noise But it wasn’t the bullet that laid him to rest was The low spark of high-heeled boys" ~Traffic - Stevie Winwood~

March 15, 2005, 08:04 PM	#8
Eric Larsen Senior Member Join Date: December 5, 2001 Location: Bountiful....Ut. Posts: 3,226	Why do you guys make me want to call you spoiled? I carried a K40 in my pocket and still carry a Makarov all of the time as a BUG! The PM is NOTHING like these guns. Hell I could carry one in every pocket and love it. The Kahr is a better gun.....nicer finish, trigger, machining etc....... The KT is still a good gun......not as nice but nice. Shoot well.............. __________________ If they dont know you have a gun.....then I did alright! If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice......Rush

March 14, 2005, 12:32 AM	#2
Hayley Senior Member Join Date: December 6, 2004 Posts: 295	Weight, size and price?

March 14, 2005, 09:56 AM	#4
CougarRed Member Join Date: February 18, 2005 Posts: 99	Who said Kahrs aren't popular? I own 2. I carry a P9 Covert in my pocket every day. Same grip as the PM9, with the slide, barrel and recoil set up of the P9. It's a little less than an inch longer than the PM9, and 1 oz heavier. Extra length in slide/barrel does not affect pocket concealment for me, but does provide better sight plane and more muzzle velocity. And I prefer the traditional recoil set up vs. Seecamp system in PM9. That said, there are a ton of people walking around with a PM9 who love them. While Keltec also enjoys some popularity because the P3AT and P32 weigh 7 oz and cost less than Kahrs, no one disputes that a 9mm is a much better self defense round than the .380 or .32. And no one disputes that Kahr's trigger is much better than KelTecs. Until recently, Kahr's main competitor in the mini-9 market was the Glock 26. I prefer the Kahr, as do a lot of people. Now, Rohrbaugh has entered the fray. But their gun costs twice as much as a Kahr, limiting their market.

March 15, 2005, 01:21 PM	#5
Watch-Six Senior Member Join Date: April 19, 2000 Location: Utah Posts: 654	The Kahr is a much better pistol. It does, however, cost more and weigh more. Not really a fair comparision. Watch-Six

March 15, 2005, 04:35 PM	#7
FirstFreedom Junior member Join Date: May 31, 2004 Location: The Toll Road State, U.S.A. Posts: 12,451	What UFO said. The PM9 is too big for pocket carry (for me), even though yes, it's better quality than the KelTec. The proper comparison for the KelTec P3AT is tiny .32s, .22s, .25s, and derringers.

March 15, 2005, 11:00 PM	#9
bubbygator Senior Member Join Date: September 2, 2004 Location: Sarasota Posts: 130	The current P3AT is light-years ahead of KelTec's offerings 7 years ago. Mine was perfectly reliable straight from the box. Otherwise, I second what has been said above.